Re: [abcusers] %%staves
Dear Phil,
%%staves {1 2 3 4}
Will typeset 4 voices on one keyboard staff.
A keyboard staff consists of two coupled staves
that are connected with a { symbol in front of them.
%%staves (1 2)(3 4)
Will print two separate staves, with two voices on each of them.
No { symbol will appear in front of the staves.
===
%%staves {1} a keyboard staff with only one voice in the right hand.
%%staves {1 2} a keyboard staff with one voice in the right hand
and one voice in the left hand.
%%staves {1 2 3} a keyboard staff with two voices in the right hand
and one voice in the left hand.
%%staves {1 2 3 4} a keyboard staff with two voices in both hands.
It seems to me that the use of {} here is both redundant and
ambiguous.
I hope it is now clear.
Groeten,
Irwin Oppenheim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
~~~*
Chazzanut Online:
http://www.joods.nl/~chazzanut/
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] %%staves
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: [abcusers] %%staves
Dear Phil,
%%staves {1 2 3 4}
Will typeset 4 voices on one keyboard staff.
A keyboard staff consists of two coupled staves
that are connected with a { symbol in front of them.
I'd expect {(V1 V2)(V3 V4)} or something similar.
And what if I want one large { with four staves ?
%%staves (1 2)(3 4)
Will print two separate staves, with two voices on each of them.
No { symbol will appear in front of the staves.
===
%%staves {1} a keyboard staff with only one voice in the right hand.
%%staves {1 2} a keyboard staff with one voice in the right hand
and one voice in the left hand.
%%staves {1 2 3} a keyboard staff with two voices in the right hand
and one voice in the left hand.
%%staves {1 2 3 4} a keyboard staff with two voices in both hands.
Some (organ music) uses 3 staves...
It seems to me that the use of {} here is both redundant and
ambiguous.
I hope it is now clear.
I'm afraid that there are a few open ends here,
especially when taking the grand-staff as one keyboard-staff
(where abc will regard it as two)
Arent
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] %%staves
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Phil Taylor wrote:
%%staves [(1 2)(3 4)]
Gives a score format: two staves, coupled with a large
[ on the left side.
or should that be
%%staves ([1 2)(3 4])
No. That has no defined meaning.
%%staves {1 2 3} a keyboard staff with two voices in the right hand
and one voice in the left hand.
Why two on the right and one on the left, rather than the other
way round?
You can achieve that with:
%%staves {1 (2 3)}
%%staves {1 2 3 4} a keyboard staff with two voices in both hands.
Or three on the right/one on the left or vice versa.
Use parentheses to make the sub-grouping explicit, eg
%%staves {(1 2 3) 4} etc.
No, it's still both redundant and ambiguous as far as I can see.
Now clearer?
Groeten,
Irwin Oppenheim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
~~~*
Chazzanut Online:
http://www.joods.nl/~chazzanut/
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] %%staves
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Arent Storm wrote:
And what if I want one large { with four staves ?
You could use %%staves [1 2 3 4] instead,
which will place a [ before the staves, though.
We can of course consider to make the semantics of {..}
similar to [...].
I.e: %%staves {1 2 3 4} will print 4 staves with
a { before, while %%staves {(1 2) (3 4)} gives two
staves with two voices each.
Would that be a good suggestion?
Irwin Oppenheim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
~~~*
Chazzanut Online:
http://www.joods.nl/~chazzanut/
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
RE: [abcusers] %%staves
I still have some problems understanding the %%staves directive,
and it still strikes me as being extremely cryptic compared with
putting the same information into V: fields in the header.
So what's the difference between
You can look at
http://anamnese.online.fr/abc/passemedio.pdf
It doesn't need I write how to use it, it's self explanatory. Just | is for separation
of voices, I should have done it for %%staves [1 2 3 4] (ex : staves [1 2 3 | 4]) it
would have been more strikening...
I've processed the same tune 5 times :
X:1 staves {1 2 3 4}
X:1 staves {1 2 | 3 4}
X:2 staves (1 2)(3 4)
X:3 staves {1 2 3}
X:4 staves [1 2 3 4]
you can even find the source here : http://anamnese.online.fr/abc/passemedio.abc
X:4
T:Pavane - Pass e medio
R:Pavane
Z:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://anamnese.fr.st
M:C
L:1/4
Q:1/4=110
K:C
%%staves [1 2 3 4]
V:1
f3 e | d f2 e/d/ | ed e/f/e/d/ | e3e | dc d/e/ d | dfed | ^cB c/d/c/B/ | ^c3 d/e/ |
f3 e | d f2 e/d/ | ed e/f/e/d/ | e/f/g/f/ ed | ^c/d/e/c/ d =B |\
^c/A/ d3/2 c/4=B/4 d/c/ | d3d | d2 d2 :|]
V:2
D3 E | FGAB | c3 c | c4 | A2 AA | _B A2 G | A3 A | A4 |
D3 E | FGAB | c4 | c2 c/B/A/G/ | A2 D2 | AGA2 | ^F3 F | ^F4 :|]
V:3
A3G | FDF2 | GF G/A/G/F/ | G3 G | F D/E/ F/G/F/E/ | F2 GD | ED E/F/E/D/ | E3 A |
A3G | FDF2 | GF G/A/G | G3 F | EA FG | EDE2 | D3 D | D2D2 :|]
V:4
%%MIDI transpose -12
D4 | D4 | C4 | C4 | D4 | D2 C _B, | A,3 A, | A,4 |
D4 | D4 | C4 | C3D | A,2 _B, G,| A, B, A,2 | D3 D | D4 :|]
It seems to me that the use of {} here is both redundant and
ambiguous.
no, it's not : it's for piano partition only
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] %%staves
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Arent Storm wrote:
And what if I want one large { with four staves ?
You could use %%staves [1 2 3 4] instead,
which will place a [ before the staves, though.
We can of course consider to make the semantics of {..}
similar to [...].
Why not; seems perfectly logical to me.
I.e: %%staves {1 2 3 4} will print 4 staves with
a { before, while %%staves {(1 2) (3 4)} gives two
staves with two voices each.
Would that be a good suggestion?
Much better.
Arent
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
RE: [abcusers] %%staves
I still have some problems understanding the %%staves directive,
and it still strikes me as being extremely cryptic compared with
putting the same information into V: fields in the header.
So what's the difference between
You can look at
http://anamnese.online.fr/abc/passemedio.pdf
Oh, I've got abcm2ps - I can figure out what it does for myself.
However, we're talking about a standard here, and it should
describe exactly how the format works. Anyone reading it
should be able to write a standard-compliant program given
that information, without having to look at the way another
program implements it. At present that's not true.
Sorry, but I do find this %%staves thing messy and ill thought
out. Here's another example. Piano staff, just two voices,
and for convenience I'll label them V:Left and V:Right.
%%staves {Right Left}
Notice anything wrong here?
There are some synths where you can re-program the keyboard so
that the high notes are on the left. Some people can even play
them like that.
And here's another - to turn long barlines off you add a | between
the voice labels. That's the abc bar line symbol, and it's being
used to mean no bar line.
Phil Taylor
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] staves
Eric Galluzzo donned his asbestos suit and opined:
|
| Regarding %%staves
| --
|
| I personally find %%staves very useful, and (despite comments to the
| contrary) very intuitive. How about adding some official variant of
| this to the standard? It seems much more concise, and more intuitive,
| than the
|
| V:1 bracket=2
|
| type notation that abc2ps had originally introduced. We are running out
| of letters for headers, though; how about lowercase s? Thus:
|
| X:1
| T:My Choir + Organ Piece
| M:4/4
| L:1/4
| s:[1 2 3 4] {(5 6) (7 8) 9}
| K:C
| ...
Well, we could, but I think I like the %%staves better. The
reason is that we really have adopeed %% as a sort of
pragma or metacommand flag, and we have a significant
body of formatting goodies in this notation. It seems
cleaner to me to leave the core abc notation fairly devoid
of formatting stuff, and package it off to the side like
this. So %%staves would be in the same class as
%%leftmargin, %%titlefont, %%indent, and the rest. They all
deal with non-musical formatting information, not with the
music itself.
One of the standard's appendices could include a list of
these, with the general suggestion that software implement
any that are applicable. For players, of course, they are
all irrelevant.
What do others think?
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
